In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, WM <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 18 Mrz., 23:50, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote: > > > > If you are unable to prove by yourself that the set of finite words is > > > countable, then further discussion with you is meaningless. > > > > What I can or cannot prove to myself is not > > an issue. > > Exactly that is the issue - and nothing else!
Another such issue that WM chooses not to face is his own incompetence as a mathematician. For example, his claim to have a linear mapping from the set of all binary sequences, B, to the set of all paths, P, of a Complete Infinite Binary Tree, by first inserting B in |R, is easily shown not to be linear, or a bijection, or ONto P.
> > What is needed here is an agreed upon standard > > of proof. > > You think if there are enough fools to agree on a foolish standard, > that would be enough? You think if there are enough fools to assert > that countably many words are sufficient to label uncountably many > words, that must be true?
Certainly WM's standards of proof are unaceptable as they allow proofs of things that any competent mathematician can disprove.
Such a WM's claim mentioned above. > > Deplorable slave! > > Regards, WM --